which is why, Warren, that modern fingerprinting does not rely on what the server lies about.
/W On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Warren Kumari <war...@kumari.net> wrote: > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 5:44 PM, George Michaelson <g...@algebras.org> > wrote: > > I have never entirely got with the people who think obscuring version > > information is necessary and correct. Designing for the bad actors > > presupposes they will somehow magically not attack you, simply because > > you obscured the version info. > > > > Root ops (I may misremember) stand out in my mind as a group who have > > from time to time said "we don't feel we need, or should tell you > > that" > > > > So on the whole, I think we should explore this "what version are you" > > question more, and possibly do better at flagging it. > > > > Having said which: people lie all the time. Either by intent, or > > because they reply with information which was correct when they set > > it, but has aged out. > > https://puck.nether.net/~jared/version.bind.results.20160402.txt > > What?!!!! You don't believe that there is at least one person running > version 3.14159? How 'bout "19,800yen"? > Surely you don't doubt that "An Italian is COMBING his hair in > suburban DES MOINES!" > > Still, nice to know that someone is keeping the love with a "C=64 with > Final Cartridge II and 1541 discdrive" > > W > > > > So even with the best of intentions, > > version-flagging needs to be taken with a grain of salt. > > > > -G > > > > On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 9:55 PM, Woodworth, John R > > <john.woodwo...@centurylink.com> wrote: > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: DNSOP [mailto:dnsop-boun...@ietf.org] On Behalf Of Paul Hoffman > >>> > >>> On 11 Feb 2017, at 17:49, Allan Liska wrote: > >>> > >>> > ISC runs a monthly survey of DNS statistics: > >>> > https://ftp.isc.org/www/survey/reports/current/fpdns.txt (this is > from > >>> > January 2017). > >>> > Information about the survey is here: > >>> > https://ftp.isc.org/www/survey/reports/current/survey.html > >>> > Not sure how useful their data is, but they have been doing it for a > >>> > long time, so they have great trending analysis. > >>> > >>> Do note, however, that fingerprinting DNS servers has gotten much > harder > >>> over time, so take the results with a very large grain of salt. For > >>> example, the software that runs that survey seems to think that there > >>> are no versions of BIND 9 since 9.4.0a0. > >>> > >> > >> Thanks Paul! > >> > >> I was wondering about that. Figured there would be more people at least > >> near the bleeding-edge. > >> > >> > >> Thanks, > >> John > >> > >>> --Paul Hoffman > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> DNSOP mailing list > >>> DNSOP@ietf.org > >>> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > >> > >> > >> -- THESE ARE THE DROIDS TO WHOM I REFER: > >> This communication is the property of CenturyLink and may contain > confidential or privileged information. Unauthorized use of this > communication is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you have > received this communication in error, please immediately notify the sender > by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the communication and any > attachments. > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> DNSOP mailing list > >> DNSOP@ietf.org > >> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > > > _______________________________________________ > > DNSOP mailing list > > DNSOP@ietf.org > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop > > > > -- > I don't think the execution is relevant when it was obviously a bad > idea in the first place. > This is like putting rabid weasels in your pants, and later expressing > regret at having chosen those particular rabid weasels and that pair > of pants. > ---maf > > _______________________________________________ > DNSOP mailing list > DNSOP@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop >
_______________________________________________ DNSOP mailing list DNSOP@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dnsop
